THE HON’BLE SMT.JUSTICE P.SREE SUDHA Civil Revision Petition No.3697 of 2023

ORDER:

This revision petition is filed against the order dated

18.07.2023 in I.A.No.373 of 2023 in O.S.No.21 of 2018, on the file of the learned Principal District Judge, at Medak.

2. An application is filed before the trial Court for receiving of the documents but the trial Court dismissed the same and aggrieved by the said order, this revision petition is preferred.

3. It is mainly contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the documents sought to be received are crucial for proper adjudication of the suit but the trial Court dismissed the same without recording proper reasons and without considering the facts and circumstances of the case. It is further contended that the trial Court dismissed the application by not permitting the petitioner to produce the documents even though the relevancy of such documents can be examined at the time of trial. It was further contended that the trial Court ought not to have gone into the admissibility or veracity of the documents at the time of inception itself and therefore, requested to set aside the order passed by the trial Court.

4. An application is filed before the trial Court by the plaintiff in the suit for receiving of the following documents:

“1. Copy of the Sale Deed vide Doc.No.3656 of 2019 dated 09.08.2019.

2. Copy of the Sale Deed vide Doc.No.4015 of 2019 dated 29.08.2019.

3. Xerox Copy of the Sale Agreement dated

04.08.2019.

4. Judgment and Decree Copy of O.S.No.21 of 2018. 5. Certified copy of Belief Report. Dis.No.2/2021/G No.4382-4383 of 2020.

6. Flight Tickets.

7. Xerox Copy of the Passport of the Defendant No.2.

8. Xerox Copy of the Passbook of Padmasri.

9. Original Raithu Bandhu Cheque Dated

19.04.2018.”

5. Petitioner stated that the above said documents are important documents and crucial to prove his case.

6. In a counter filed by the respondents it is stated that petitioner/plaintiff filed petition under Order VIII, Rule 1(a)(3) of CPC, whereas the said provision of law is only meant for defendants but whereas the petitioner being the plaintiff is not permitted to invoke the said provision of law for receiving the documents. The plaintiff intentionally filed the petition by invoking wrong provision of law only with the mala fide intention to drag the matter under one or other pretext as such the petition itself is not maintainable and also stated that plaintiff ought to have file the petition under Order VII, Rule 14(3) of CPC for receiving the documents but he has not explained any reason for non-filing of the documents along with the suit and he has not filed any application for condonation of delay and without any reasons he filed the application and he has not stated how they are related to suit and thus requested the Court to dismiss the same. The trial Court considering the arguments of the respondents, dismissed the application.

7. O.S.No.21 of 2018 is filed by the plaintiff for specific performance of contract and agreement of sale in respect of the suit schedule lands total extent of Ac.10.13 guntas and regarding that an ex parte order was passed on 28.02.2019 with a direction to execute registered sale deed in respect of suit schedule properties within two (02) months.

8. I.A.No.46 of 2020 is filed by respondents/defendants herein for setting aside the ex parte order on the ground that suit summons were served to the wrong address. In I.A it is submitted that defendant No.2 and petitioner/plaintiff are best friends and defendant No.2 is residing in U.S.A and he asked plaintiff to take care of his mother i.e., defendant No.1. Defendant No.2 executed G.P.A in favour of plaintiff in respect of other properties. Defendant No.2 purchased suit property in the name of his mother. The plaintiff taking advantage of acquaintance with the family wrongly represented for survey of land the documents are required and collected original documents from defendant No.1. He has filed suit by mentioning w